Your 2 x-height (lowercase) is daring, though could be taller for a better legibility (3 x-height is expected, at least). I cannot quite understand your choices in "c" and "w" (the former is puzzling to me, while the latter might be a mirror after "m"). Unnecessary 'wide' matrix (4 dots of width instead of 3), perhaps. Interesting style, which would look quite different as a strict 3x5 (with a single dot of descender).
2/2/2 divided for each line good for minimum disp
1 Comment
Your 2 x-height (lowercase) is daring, though could be taller for a better legibility (3 x-height is expected, at least). I cannot quite understand your choices in "c" and "w" (the former is puzzling to me, while the latter might be a mirror after "m"). Unnecessary 'wide' matrix (4 dots of width instead of 3), perhaps. Interesting style, which would look quite different as a strict 3x5 (with a single dot of descender).
Please sign in to comment.